# Table of Contents

**FOREWORD** .................................................................................................................. 4

**1 INTRODUCTION** ........................................................................................................ 5

Top 10 Tips .......................................................................................................................... 6

**SECTION 2 COLLABORATION** ....................................................................................... 7

2.1 **THE CONTEXT FOR COLLABORATION** ................................................................. 8

Accountability for public funding ...................................................................................... 8

Accountability to students ................................................................................................. 9

Reduction in Public Funding ............................................................................................. 9

2.4 **UNDERSTANDING BARRIERS TO PARTICIPATION** ............................................. 13

Lack of time, timescales, and planning horizons .............................................................. 13

Familiarity and understanding with archive services ....................................................... 13

Reliance on familiar academic disciplines ...................................................................... 14

Uncatalogued, undigitised material and making your collection discoverable .................. 14

Lack of knowledge of opportunities ................................................................................ 15

Lack of knowledge of the higher education funding and regulatory landscape ............... 15

Differences in institutional priorities ............................................................................... 16

Geography ....................................................................................................................... 16

Attitudes to risk ................................................................................................................ 16

2.3 **TYPES OF COLLABORATION** ................................................................................. 17

**SECTION 3 FORMING A COLLABORATION** ................................................................. 25

3.1 **ADVANCE THINKING** ............................................................................................ 26

Why? .................................................................................................................................. 26

What? .................................................................................................................................. 27

How? .................................................................................................................................. 28

3.2 **MAKING CONTACT AND FIRST STEPS** ................................................................. 29

3.3 **COMMON GOALS AND CULTURAL DIFFERENCES** ........................................... 33

**SECTION 4 DEVELOPING COLLABORATIVE WORKING** ........................................... 39

4.1 **BUILDING ON COLLABORATION** ....................................................................... 40

4.2 **EMBEDDING COLLABORATION** .......................................................................... 45

4.3 **OPPORTUNITIES FOR FUTURE COLLABORATION** ........................................... 47

4.4 **SOURCES OF FUNDING** ....................................................................................... 10

**SECTION 5 RECORDING ACTIVITIES AND CAPTURING IMPACT** ............................... 14

5.1 **ARCHIVE SERVICES MEASUREMENTS** ............................................................... 15 5.2 HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS MEASUREMENTS

5.2.1 The Research Excellence Framework (REF)

5.2.2 Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework (TEF)

5.2.3 Knowledge Exchange Framework (KEF)

5.3 EVALUATING COLLABORATIVE ACTIVITIES: FINDING COMMON GROUND

5.4 RAISING YOUR PROFILE THROUGH COLLABORATION

SECTION 6 KEY TERMS, CONCEPTS, AND RESOURCES

6.1 PLANNING TEMPLATE

6.2 PROFILE RAISING CHECKLIST

6.3 KEY TERMS AND CONCEPTS REFERRED TO IN THE GUIDANCE

6.4 USEFUL RESOURCES

June 2018 revision researched and written by Paddy McNulty and Mairead O’Rourke. Original guidance researched and written by Caroline Peach 2014/15.

We would like to thank the staff of The National Archives, History UK members, RLUK, workshop participants, case study contributors, and everyone who was involved in the guidance consultations. Without your contributions this guidance would not have been possible. Foreword

The National Archives collection of historical government papers and public records constitutes one of the largest and most significant archives in the world. More widely, this country’s hugely rich and diverse network of more than 2,500 archives, are our collective memory, inspiring learning and research, and shaping our understanding of our past. We all have an interest in strengthening and supporting collaboration, learning and research, underpinned by our rich archival heritage.

That is why, in 2015, The National Archives worked with Research Libraries UK (RLUK) to publish guidance with the aim of improving collaboration between archives and academic institutions of all kinds. Three years on, the time is right for a refreshed approach building on all that we have learned in that time. This new edition of the guidance takes into account the impact of the Research Excellence Framework (REF), the introduction of the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) and the opportunities arising from the second round of the AHRC’s Doctoral Training Partnerships (DTPs).

The National Archives has worked with History UK (which promotes history in higher education) to produce this revised guidance. Together, we have engaged with historians, researchers and archivists to shape our understanding of current practices and develop new approaches to encouraging future collaboration. The guidance has been shaped by the work of History UK and Higher Education Archive Programme (HEAP) members which provided a qualitative research base and new best practice case studies.

We are committed to encouraging cross-sector research collaboration. We hope that this refreshed guidance will help build on the successes of the past few years and inspire even greater opportunities for meaningful collaboration for the future.

Jeff James, Chief Executive and Keeper, The National Archives

Professor Heather Shore, Co-Convenor, History UK 1 Introduction

This guidance has been commissioned by The National Archives and History UK to support collaboration between the archive and higher education (HE) sectors. This is a revised edition. It has been updated in recognition of the changes that have taken place within the two sectors since 2015.

The following activities have informed this revision: a survey of archivists and academics, a consultation workshop, collation of case studies and a review of current policy drivers in both sectors.

The purpose of this guidance is to highlight the range of opportunities that exist for collaboration between the archive and HE sectors. It also provides information on the practical issues associated with the formation, development and sustainability of collaborations.

As well as providing generic information about working in collaboration, the guidance highlights the distinctive characteristics and recent changes in the higher education sector.

The guidance is structured into five sections:

- What do we mean by collaboration?
- Forming a collaboration?
- Developing your collaboration
- Recording activities and capturing impact
- An appendix of key terms, concepts and resources

We would advise you to try and read through the whole guidance in order.

Whilst the main audience of this guidance is likely to be the archive sector, the guidance can be used by academics and higher education institutions to understand and develop collaborations with archive services. Top 10 tips

01. Be confident about getting what you need from collaboration. Ask questions early and each partner should act as equals.

02. Establish good personal contacts at the early stages of forming a collaboration: do not be afraid to develop new contacts and take frequent opportunities to talk about your work.

03. Develop contacts across each sector – connect with archivists, engagement staff, university librarians, and ‘sector brokers’ who can act as champions for your professional expertise and collections.

04. Explore whether you can work in partnership with other local organisations to present a group ‘archive and special collections offer’ to local higher education institutions.

05. Make a written record of the things that you and your partner organisation agree and commit to as part of the collaboration. Make sure this is shared after each meeting or discussion so that you both have a common understanding of goals and responsibilities at all stages.

06. Identify (and put a cost against) the time that goes into collaborations, either at the outset as part of the planning process, or as part of your project monitoring so that you can articulate the value of your contribution and make the case for financial support.

07. Do not underestimate students and the value that they can bring, particularly in terms of new approaches to research and working practices.

08. Collaborative working can be demanding. Shared vision, shared commitment and strong institutional support are essential for success.

09. Don’t wait to be asked to report the successes of your work: seek out opportunities to share them widely.

10. Know your value and have a go! Section 2 Collaboration Collaboration can be defined as “the action of working with someone to produce or create something”,

This guidance uses the term ‘collaboration’ to embrace the range of ways in which the archive and higher education sectors work together.

While archive and higher education ‘sectors’ are referred to throughout the guide they are not always independent. Many archives exist within higher education institutions (HEIs) and are important instigators and facilitators of collaboration. In this guidance the term ‘archives’ is used to group together archive practitioners and ‘higher education’ for academics, researchers and students based in higher education institutions.

2.1 The context for collaboration

Collaboration is driven by common goals and the prospect of achieving more by working together than could be achieved by working separately.

At present there are around 2500 archives in the UK and 143 higher education institutions. Many archive services are parts of larger organisations, such as Local Authorities, businesses, and there are 287 archives within higher education institutions. The 143 higher education institutions contain within them schools, facilities, departments, research clusters, and centres. So, the scope for archive and higher education collaboration has huge potential.

The growth in popularity of collaborative working can be attributed to a number of drivers that are outlined below.

Accountability for public funding

Higher education institutions (HEIs) and archive services have been encouraged for many years to demonstrate accountability for funding. In the higher education sector this has seen the changes to regulatory and funding landscape, and the development of the Research Excellence Framework (REF) and the Knowledge Exchange Framework (KEF). Accountability to students

Universities are increasingly accountable to their students. Increases in tuition fees, the increased use of student-based metrics, and the establishment of the Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework (TEF) are resulting in a stronger focus on student outcomes.

Reduction in Public Funding

Many archive services have seen a significant decrease in funding over recent years which has had consequences such as a decrease in staff numbers (including professional staff), and a fall in the time that can be spent on curatorial or collection-based activities as resources are focused on maintaining front line services and ‘open doors’. There has also been a reduction in central funding for higher education institutions. 2.2 Benefits and barriers of collaboration

To complement the research carried out in 2015, an in-depth consultation with the archive and higher education sectors was carried out in Spring 2018. This identified a range of benefits and barriers to collaboration. The findings of this consultation have informed this updated guidance.

2.2.1 The benefits of collaboration

There are many benefits to collaboration, and organisational and individual benefits are key drivers for collaborative projects being established. Many of the benefits identified were relevant to both sectors, for instance knowledge exchange and access to specialist expertise.

Archives identified the following key benefits of collaborating:

- Enhanced impact and profile raising

- User/audience development

- New interpretation of archives

- Knowledge exchange

- Access to specialist expertise

- Access to new research

- Access to new funding streams Higher Education Institutions identified the following benefits:

- Access to unique and distinctive collections

- Access to specialist expertise

- Improving the student experience

- Improving student employability

- Knowledge exchange

- Impact – contribution to REF/REF case studies

- Access to new research

- New interpretation of archives

- Archive based learning - TEF

Some of the benefits of collaboration that have been identified by each sector are expanded upon below.

| Archives | Higher Education | |-----------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------| | Enhanced impact and profile raising | Access to specialist expertise: | | Profile-raising through association with prestigious partners. | Access to the skills, knowledge, and experience held outside of the higher education sector by staff and volunteers in the archive sector. | | Opportunities to demonstrate the value and impact of archives to a wider audience. | | | Archives | Higher Education | |------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | **Knowledge exchange:** | **Knowledge exchange:** | | Exchange of knowledge and ideas to address gaps in specialist expertise (e.g. IT or subject specialisms), and access to research frameworks. | Exchange of knowledge and ideas and the opportunity for academic research to be utilised outside of the higher education sector. | | **User/audience development:** | **User/audience development:** | | Opportunities to expand audience - particularly student and academic audiences. | Opportunities to expand audience reach, particularly community and schools audiences. | | **New interpretations of archives** | **Access to unique and distinctive collections** | | Opportunities to engage with students and academics, and access to new technologies and approaches, on how archives can be used and interpreted. | Opportunities to access the collections held within archives can provide a richer student experience, and support research. | | **Access to specialist expertise and new research** | **Enhanced learning and student experience:** | | Opportunities to engage with academic specialist and experts in their fields; and to access areas of new research with relevance to archive practice or collections. | Increased learning opportunities – for example, archives as sources for dissertations, increased potential employability through work experience placements, and archives as location for alternative teaching methodologies. | | **Funding:** | **Supporting higher education frameworks (REF/TEF)** | | Access to HE funding streams and associated programmes. | Collaborating with archives can support higher education institutions in the REF scores and TEF ranking. | 2.4 Understanding barriers to participation

Whilst enthusiasm for collaboration between archive and higher education organisations is generally high, it is also useful to think about potential barriers to participation in collaborative activities and the things that can go wrong along the way. Many of the potential barriers can be avoided by understanding the pressures on each of the organisations involved in the collaboration or can be overcome by improving communication and planning.

Lack of time, timescales, and planning horizons

Both archive practitioners and academics cite lack of time and differences in peak activity periods between the sectors as a major limiting factor. Available time may vary at different periods of the year. For example, avoid the end of financial years (March in the archive sector, July in the HE sector), the start of academic terms, and exam season, as these are particularly busy times.

Decision making timescales can vary between the archive and HE sectors. Whilst many academics are used to dropping everything to plan and submit a funding bid for a project within six to eight weeks, many archive practitioners cannot work like this. The organisations in which they work require much longer planning horizons (commonly in excess of six months). Clearly the complexity of the project will influence how much time is needed for planning and decision-making but these cultural differences between organisations are an important consideration and should be stated as they are not necessarily obvious.

Familiarity and understanding with archive services

It is a common assumption of sectors to presume knowledge of their skills, processes, assets, and resources are understood by others from outside their sector; in reality this cross sector knowledge is uncommon. For instance, members of the higher education sector may not have a good understanding of the range of collections, materials and professional expertise that can be found in an archive service. High-level descriptions of the nature of your collections, both in terms of subject matter and type of material can be a useful way of highlighting the breadth and depth of collections available to academics. It is important to make clear (preferably online) how academics can find out more about the collections held by your archive service.

Reader registration requirements, appointment booking systems, handling procedures, security measures, preservation requirements and copyright restrictions can sometimes seem like a conspiracy designed to restrict access and use. This can be a particular issue when engaging with inexperienced researchers who have had less interaction with primary source material. Clear communication about the policies and processes you use at the outset of a project will help to avoid and overcome frustrations. The Archive Service Accreditation guidance includes a useful guide to what should be included in policies on access.

Reliance on familiar academic disciplines

The archive sector has a natural bias to directly-related archival, historical, or conservation-focused disciplines. The range of potential partner academic disciplines can be overwhelming. A result of this is that innovative and exciting collaborative projects with other disciplines can be overlooked as it may be felt that they do not ‘fit well’ with the archive’s functions or collections.

Exploring the potential for collaboration with academics from across a broad range of disciplines is likely to open up greater opportunities for collaboration.

Uncatalogued, undigitised material and making your collection discoverable

People from both sectors can be surprised by the quantity of uncatalogued and/or undigitised material. Academics express surprise when they discover that relatively small proportions of material held by archive services are available in online catalogues, and archivists express frustration at the assumption that large quantities of material are fully described in online catalogues or available in digital format. For some academics, uncatalogued material is a golden opportunity for research and its presence can be turned into an opportunity for collaboration. Describing collections at a high level on an archive’s website is useful, together with providing a named contact who can provide further information about the collection. Related to the issue of uncatalogued material is that of finding relevant research material across disparate collections. Portals such as Discovery (which holds descriptions of the holdings of TNA as well as more than 2,500 archives across the country), the Archives Hub, and AIM25 are useful resources for academics seeking to identify material from a wide range of sources as well as a means of promoting collections amongst diverse audiences.

**Lack of knowledge of opportunities**

Archivists and staff within their services identify the difficulty in finding out about current opportunities within the higher education sector. Knowledge of developments in relevant research fields could help archivists to raise the profile of particular collections and/or, prioritise cataloguing, conservation or digitisation.

It is useful for individual archive services to identify the research interests of local higher education institutions by individual archive services. Newsletters of major funders (such as the AHRC and the other research councils) can provide a useful insight into up-coming research topics, though the monitoring of mailing lists may not be feasible. An invaluable source of information can come from existing contacts in the higher education sector.

**Lack of knowledge of the higher education funding and regulatory landscape**

Higher Education has experienced considerable changes in its funding and regulatory landscape between 2016 and 2018. In 2018 the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) was closed, with responsibilities being taken over by two new organisations - United Kingdom Research and Innovation (UKRI) and the Office for Students (OfS). UKRI brings together the seven research councils, Innovate UK, and the research and knowledge exchange functions of HEFCE. The Office for Students took over student and teaching focused functions of HEFCE and manages the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF).

There are three key higher education frameworks that may be particularly relevant for contextualising cross-sector collaborations – the Research Excellence Framework (REF), the Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework (TEF), and the Office for Students (OfS). (TEF), and the Knowledge Exchange Framework (KEF). More detailed information on these frameworks is in section 5 of this guidance.

**Differences in institutional priorities**

Archive services and higher education institutions are likely to have different institutional priorities, and this was cited as a significant barrier to developing collaborative working. Whilst it may appear that it is difficult to rectify this, it in itself it may not be an insurmountable barrier. By considered planning, and frank and honest conservations between archive services, academics, and higher education institutions shared priorities can be established and harnessed to further collaborative practice,

**Geography**

Collaboration is often easiest between organisations that are close to one another geographically. Small distances make visits and face-to-face meetings easier and potentially increase the range of collaborative activity that is possible. Geography need not be a barrier to all forms of collaboration though. Large-scale research projects frequently involve partners from geographically distant locations which can be supported by various technologies. The key is to maintain communication through both informal and formal channels.

**Attitudes to risk**

Research is an inherently risky business. From the earliest stages of forming a research proposal and the risks associated with time invested in bidding for funding, through to the outcomes of the research process, one cannot guarantee (or predict) results. In some cases, the tolerance for risk-taking in the HEI might be much higher than would ever normally be considered acceptable by an archive service as ‘failure’ of research projects is not seen as a negative but as a valuable learning experience. Both sectors need to be clear about their appetite for risk and which organisation carries the risk (or how much risk). 2.3 Types of collaboration

There are a variety of ways in which the two sectors can work together and there is scope for collaboration between organisations of all sizes and in a range of institutional contexts.

The most important part of collaboration is making initial contact and agreeing objectives between the organisations. Once this has been achieved, the collaboration frequently deepens as projects build on previous successes and trusted relationships. Examples of the areas in which archive services and higher education institutions collaborate are listed below and are outlined in more detail in the accompanying case studies. These activities are not necessarily distinct from one another and, indeed, one may lead to another.

The charts below, from the 2018 consultation demonstrate the different types of collaboration between the archive and higher education sectors. What types of collaborative activity do you undertake with archives?

- Teaching
- Student placements
- Student experiences/employability activities
- Exhibitions/ events/ festivals
- Outreach programmes
- Digitisation projects
- Research
- Funded project
- Collaborative Doctoral Partnerships (CDP)
- Shared Services
- Other - please specify: As can be seen, teaching, student placements, exhibitions, outreach, research and digitisation are significant areas of collaboration between the sectors.

It is useful to consider all the types of collaboration available and be open to new ideas proposed by potential partners. To help understand these further a brief synopsis of each type of collaboration follows:

| Collaboration type | Description and ideas for collaboration | |-------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Teaching and learning activities | Archives have a wealth of collections and knowledge that can used by academics to complement their students’ experiences | | | Archives can benefit from having groups of younger people involved | | | These types of collaborations can be developed between organisations and may lead to more specific projects | | | Think beyond the ‘traditional’ humanities subjects (history, archive studies etc.) – arts, social sciences, science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects can also benefit from partnering with archives | | Student volunteers, placements, and internships | Undergraduates, post-graduates, and doctoral students all have placements with archives and may have already ‘worked’ with them | | | Many students now volunteer with archives, but the terminology may differ according to the nature of the project/work they are carrying out. Many ‘internships’ are actually work placements. | | | Students can bring energy and new perspectives to archives | | Collaboration type | Description and ideas for collaboration | |--------------------|-----------------------------------------| | Archives | Archives provide valuable experience and employability skills\
| | Archives gain research into their collections that is increasingly hard for them to carry out at present funding levels\
| | Archives can provide space for students to develop ‘real world’ skills | | Exhibitions | Academic research, knowledge, and expertise contribute to public exhibitions\
| | Exhibitions can be temporary and/or located off-site\
| | Archives can contribute their collections and in-depth knowledge of these to collaborative exhibitions\
| | Need to ensure that suitable interpretation is conducted for a public audience | | Outreach | Academics may want to engage communities to assist in their research or learning activities\
| | Archives have developed community engagement activities\
| | Funding can be from either academic or heritage sources depending on the focus of the activity is and why it being carried out | | Research | Archives have unique and distinctive archival material that is not found elsewhere and support academic research | | Collaboration type | Description and ideas for collaboration | |--------------------|----------------------------------------| | | Research is likely to be from individuals or small groups and can be carried out by undergraduates, post-grads, doctoral students, or academics. Archives support and assist student and academic research though are not always recognised or cited in research results/publications. Where possible archives should seek that their contribution is recognised. | | Digitisation (and Research & Development) | Digitisation of archival material can unlock research and user potential R&D is the focused researching, developing and testing a technical processes, product, machine, or service. It may not always result in an end product, but the process is still valuable Archives can offer a range of collections, audiences, or spaces for academic R&D Archives may benefit from access to new technologies or the applications of technology | Case Study 1

Title: Undergraduate First Year History Students Explore the Trial of Charles I Archives: Canterbury Cathedral Archives, The National Archives HEI: Canterbury Christ Church University Source: Dr Sara Wolfson SFHEA Theme: Teaching; Using archives for alternative teaching formats

Canterbury Christ Church University has experimented with workshops rather than traditional lectures across all levels of undergraduate study using archival material from The National Archives and Canterbury Cathedral Archives and Library. This differed from the way history has conventionally been taught, with third year special subjects primarily adopting the workshop approach.

Students in their historiographical first year course recreated Charles I’s trial of 1649 with the help of an external scholar, Dr Simon Healy from History of Parliament. The core reading for the task was split up amongst the students, who then separated into prosecution and defence teams. Role-play, historical investigation, teamwork and interaction presented the course in a creative way to highlight the historical debates that are still very much alive today. Students were tasked with listening to an audio extract on The National Archives website from a report of the trial of Charles I, January 1649, (Catalogue ref: TNA SP 16/517).

On reflecting upon the experience of workshops, a first year student emphasised the holistic benefits of this form of teaching: ‘This approach has inspired me, and certainly others I have noticed, with confidence to articulate and develop my thinking on a given topic’.

By working directly with archival material in an interactive manner helped to shape the individual student experience, while maintaining the academic rigour of historical study. Case Study 2

Title: Our Criminal Ancestors Archives: Hull History Centre and East Riding Archives HEI: University of Hull, Leeds Beckett University Source: Dr. Helen Johnston (Hull), Professor Heather Shore (Leeds Beckett), Victoria Dawson (Project Researcher) Theme: History, Criminology and Family History

This collaborative Arts and Humanities Research Council funded project emerged as a follow-on from the AHRC funded research network, ‘Our Criminal Past’ (2013-14).

The project aimed to stimulate and facilitate creative public engagement with crime history through knowledge exchange, interactive workshops and website dissemination.

The objectives of the project were to:

- Establish and maintain an interactive and open access website which guides, assists and directs members of the public in tracing their criminal ancestors
- Create and produce an accessible source guide on the use of criminal records
- Identify the national and most important local criminal record collections held at the Hull History Centre and the East Riding Archives
- Run three interactive workshops

Three projects were held at the Hull History Centre, focused on crime, policing and punishment. Talks from expert speakers were combined with document handling session and workshops. The participants (members of the public) developed their skills as family and community historians by gaining an introduction to and familiarity with criminal justice and related records. By focusing particularly on local records, the events were specifically designed to encourage participants to explore and use the rich local archive collections. The expert talks were orientated towards gaining skills and proficiency in interpreting records. Speakers included established academics alongside PhD students, who were able to gain experience in public engagement. At the third event the project website was launched along with the hardcopy booklet, which was prepared in collaboration with the Hull History Centre and East Riding Archives. The booklet provides historical context on crime, policing and punishment along with information on the related documents that are held in the archives. It is available as a free hard-copy resource at the archives and as an electronic download on the website.

The website (https://ourcriminalancestors.org) aims to provide free expert advice for those interested in tracing their criminal ancestry. It also allows individuals to ‘pin’ details of their ancestry or crime history research on to the History Pin map. This draws on crowd-sourced methods to develop public participation in historical research.

Image: East Riding Archive Section 3 Forming a collaboration A key element to successful collaborations is that they are mutually beneficial. Organisations should take time to understand why they would like to enter into collaboration, what they need and what they can offer, and how they can work to make the collaboration a success for everyone involved.

### 3.1 Advance thinking

**Why?**

Before organisations can begin to collaborate, it is important to explore the drivers, identifying the benefits to all parties involved, and what each party wants to achieve from it.

It is important not to enter into a collaboration for the sake of it. Before seeking, or entering into a collaborations, organisations should take time to consider how the collaboration would fit with the organisations aims, objectives, and strategic priorities; additionally, what benefits will the collaboration bring to the organisations, collaborations, and stakeholders involved.

Once these have been considered, and an organisation is ready to enter into collaborations, one should take time to:

1. **Identify a suitable collaborator**, whether it be an archive service and its associated collections and expertise, or an HEI with its staff, departmental and organisational specialist areas.
2. **Check how the proposed activity fits both organisations’ strategic priorities and core objectives.**
3. **Clarify whether the proposed activity enables you to do something that you would not be able to do on your own.**
4. **Identify the ancillary benefits to the collaboration**, for instance, how the profile of your organisation will benefit from the collaboration, or how the collaboration will enable you to access new audiences. It is important that archive services and Higher Education Institutions take time to reflect on what each organisation can bring to a collaboration, and how each organisation, project, and the people involved benefit. It is likely that collaborations will identify a series of mutual and non-mutual benefits, and a strategic assessment at the start will enable you to make an informed decision as whether to proceed or not. It may also result in more successful collaboration in the long run.

**What?**

The next step is to think about resources and what you are able to contribute to a collaboration.

- **Time** = individual and organisational time

- **People** = skills and expertise of staff and volunteers

- **Assets** = your collections, rooms, building, facilities, specialist equipment

- **Funding** = core funding, project funding, income The organisations involved in the collaboration should take time to consider the following questions – before any collaborative activity takes place:

- Does the proposed activity require additional resource or could it, with careful planning, be accommodated from within existing resources?

- How much time and additional resource can each organisation afford to invest in the planning stages of the proposed activity?

- Have suitable funding streams been identified to support the collaboration? Can cross-sector funding be accessed? How much internal funding would each partner need to contribute?

- Can you afford for the project to ‘fail’? What are the risks to each organisation and the people involved if the project fails?

**How?**

Finally, think about what you know about the way your organisation works and the impact that might have on the ease or difficulty of collaborative working.

Once you have considered the above and are comfortable with the capacity of your organisation for collaborative working, and how the process might work, it is vital that you spend time thinking about your potential partner organisation in similar terms. It is worth all organisations spending time together to identify the drivers for collaboration, what is needed to make it work, and highlight processes and support each organisation has to follow. By taking time to consider all these elements in before any activity starts will help in the long run.

3.2 Making contact and first steps

This section is focused on archives making contact with HEIs. Increasingly HEIs are contacting archive services to explore collaborative working. If you are approached by an HEI to get involved in a collaborative project you should still carry out the assessment outlined in the previous section before committing yourself.

Many collaborative projects grow from existing relationships between archive practitioners and colleagues in higher education institutions. Establishing initial contact without pre-existing relationships can be difficult but the following suggestions, made by archivists and academics, should ease the process:

- Research the institutional missions and goals of local HEIs and identify subject strengths or subjects that align with your collections and expertise.
- Make it easy for academics to contact you. Show how you can support research activities and provide contact information for named individuals on your website.
- Approach a librarian, archivist, public engagement staff, sector brokers, or cross-discipline development department within the university and ask them who to contact within the subject areas you have identified.
- Identify and contact higher education public engagement staff, sector brokers, or cross-discipline development departments; these people can provide a ‘gateway’ to a wider range of academics.
- Use contacts made with researchers and students who use your archive service in order to introduce your organisation to their HEI.
- Use university websites to identify academics within subject areas and to find out more about their research interests.
- Use social networking platforms such as LinkedIn, Academia.edu, or ResearchGate to find out more about individuals, as a route to making contact, or as a means of engaging in ‘group’ discussions about topics. • Produce a brief summary of the collections / services that your archive service has and ask for it to be included in bulletins to academics, subject specialist groups and societies. Include relevant web pages and contact details.

• Follow and contribute to the blogs and Twitter accounts of subject areas, projects or individuals to keep up to date with activities and interests.

• Use academic mailing lists (for example JiscMail lists) to promote collections, activities or engage in online discussions.

• Network at local events such as exhibition openings, talks and seminars to meet local academics, find out about local initiatives and promote your organisation and its collections to peers beyond your own profession. These are generally open to the public and advertised via the university Events pages.

• Attend academic conferences in subject areas relevant to your collections or other events that target academics and don’t be afraid to ask questions and talk to speakers after sessions.

• Make initial contact with academics by email rather than telephone but don’t be put off if they do not reply immediately and do not be deterred from following up with additional emails.

• Some times of the year are particularly busy, for example it is best to avoid making contact at the start of the academic year and during exams and marking periods (particularly May and June).

Once you have made initial contact, follow-up quickly with a face-to-face meeting. Use the meeting to explore opportunities for collaboration in more detail, for example, by providing a tour of key collections and by introducing your contact to colleagues (for example in learning or outreach if you have one), by showing the space or facilities that you have available to support teaching, research or engagement activities. Use the meeting to find out more about research interests and the priorities of the higher education institution.

It is important that this initial meeting is as open and frank as possible – allowing all parties to discuss their drivers for collaboration, explore what resources each party needs and expects, identify how the collaborative project could work, and provide an opportunity to discuss common goals and cultural differences. Be open minded about the collaborative possibilities and be open to your project ideas evolving.

It may not be possible to discuss everything in detail in one meeting, so follow up meetings or video conferences may be necessary. Whilst it may seem time-consuming at the beginning, having reasonable planning time before a collaboration will result in a smoother and more successful project.

**Case Study 3**

**Title:** Operation War Diary\
**Archives:** The National Archives (TNA)\
**HEI:** Goldsmiths, University of London\
**Source:** Professor Richard Grayson\
**Theme:** First World War History – engaging the public in crowdsourcing data

In 2012 Richard Grayson was invited by the Imperial War Museums (IWM) to convene an Academic Advisory Group for their digital First World War centenary projects. This was on the basis of the ‘military history from the street’ methods developed for his 2009 book *Belfast Boys*. A key project was Operation War Diary (OWD) on which the IWM were working with The National Archives and Zooniverse. OWD seeks to gather data through crowdsourcing with ‘Citizen Historians’ tagging daily activities British army units during the First World War as recorded in official unit ‘war diaries’. The academics advised on how to categorise the complex data in the diaries to enable subsequent analysis. Data gathering took place for three main purposes: to enrich TNA’s catalogue descriptions for 1.5 million pages of unit war diaries; to provide evidence about individuals in IWM’s *Lives of the First World War* project; and to present academics with large amounts of accurate data to help them gain a better understanding of how the war was fought. The first research findings (in by far the largest such study ever) were published in Grayson’s article in the British Journal for Military History in February 2016, receiving extensive media coverage. Key points were that infantry battalions spent 47% of their time at the front and/or fighting, with 62% for the artillery and 20% for the cavalry.

This led to headlines about ‘Tommies’ spending less than half their time at the front. The research used data compiled to 18th June 2015 when there had been 612,962 data tags from more than 12,600 registered users and more than 14,400 anonymous users. By the end of 2017 there were just under 16,000 registered volunteers, with 871,236 tags placed on 140,995 completed diary pages. 3.3 Common goals and cultural differences

Initial contact can be made by the archive service or instigated by staff and departments within HEIs. Once initial contact has been made, it is essential to establish honest and open communication channels. A successful collaboration is based on clear goals, professional respect, an understanding of mutual benefits, recognition of each other's resources, and good communication.

The cultural differences between the HE sector and the archive sector can be significant, particularly in terms of motivation for collaborations. For example, the level of importance placed on scholarly research activities is very different. For individual academics there is often a strong personal motivation, with research being the primary purpose of their involvement in a project and linked to career advancement. Academic outputs such as conference papers, journal articles, and books are all highly valued by the HE sector, as is the ability to attract research funding. For archive practitioners research projects may be seen as ancillary to the core functions of the archive, though they bring benefits to the organisation, its collections and users, and staff. It is therefore important to understand the personal and organisational motivation for collaboration. Cultures can collide when the differences between team and individual motivations, and between the motivations of the two sectors, are not understood.

3.4 Planning

An activity stands a good chance of being successful if all parties have early input into its planning. Early planning sessions allow contributions to be made from the entire range of professional perspectives; they enable pitfalls to be spotted and ensure that expectations are well managed, and commitments clearly understood. It is often useful for one organisation to take the lead - for example whichever partner may be responsible for submitting a bid for funding to support the collaboration - and for everyone to have identified roles and nominated representatives.

The following template identifies things to think about at the planning stage that will help you identify common goals and minimise the impact of cultural differences; it brings together recommendations from both the archive and HE sectors. A copy of this template is in the Resources section of this guidance.

### Strategic drivers for collaboration

| Archive | HEI | |---------|-----|

### Summary of the proposed collaborative activity:

### Desired outputs and outcomes

### Benefits to collaborators

| Archive | HEI | |---------|-----|

### Target audience

| Archive | HEI | |---------|-----|

### Task

| Lead person/ organisation | |---------------------------| | Project manager (PM) | | Organising meetings and maintaining project records | | Budget holder/ responsible for financial reporting | | Contract management | | Employment/ management of staff |

### Project sponsors (the decision makers in each organisation)

| Archive | HEI | |---------|-----|

### Timelines/ key dates relevant to this project? (decision meetings)

| Archive | HEI | |---------|-----|

### Skills required | Resources required | Gaps

| Costs (including staff time and back office functions) | |------------------------------------------------------| | Archive | HEI |

| In-kind Contributions | |-----------------------| | Archive | HEI |

| Insurance implications (policies checked) | VAT status (checked) | Copyright and licensing (checked) | |------------------------------------------|----------------------|----------------------------------| | | | |

| Measuring impact: approach | |----------------------------| | |

| Disseminating results/ Publication strategy | |---------------------------------------------| | Method (articles, conference papers, online hosting) | Lead | Timeline | |------------------------------------------------------|------|----------| | | | |

| Access to collections | |-----------------------| | Reader registration requirements | Document handling | | Booking appointments | Security and preservation |

| University ethics board requirements for research (if relevant) | |---------------------------------------------------------------| | |

It is worth investing time at this stage to avoid misunderstandings later on. Record and share this information so that you have the same list and a common understanding of what is involved. Feedback from academics and archivists alike has stressed the importance of being particularly clear about research goals and the beneficiaries of research projects.

Try to ensure that you are speaking a common language, even for seemingly basic matters, for example:

- Explain sector specific acronyms
- Do you have a common understanding about what is a ‘large’ or ‘small’ amount of money?
- Does the contribution of half a day’s time for a meeting have the same implications for staff from the archive and the HEI?

Different organisations and different forms of collaboration will determine the degree of formality with which this information is recorded. Even the most informal of collaborations should be backed up by an audit trail. Other options for recording how the collaboration will work include recording minutes of meetings, establishing a Memorandum of Understanding, following a formal project management approach (e.g. PRINCE2), using a funding bid as the project documentation, or establishing a partnership agreement. Case Study 4

Title: Bath Spa University Archive Project Archives: Wiltshire & Swindon History Centre (W&SHC) HEI: Bath Spa University Source: Dr Alison Hems Theme: Planning a new university archive with contributions from students and academics. Disciplines: History and Geography, visual arts, performing arts, and heritage management.

This project involved setting up the University archive with the support of Wiltshire & Swindon History Centre (W&SHC). Led by the History Department, its initial aim was to safeguard the institutional memory of the University during a period of significant internal change. At the same time, the campus sits within a complex historic environment, and documentary evidence relating to its many pasts form a rich resource from which our students can draw, across a wide range of disciplines.

Preliminary work to create the archive was overseen by W&SHC and academic staff, through a series of small student projects. A student volunteer, who had already worked in the Wiltshire archive, managed these projects on a day-to-day basis.

Work on and in the archive has led to the creation of walking tours of the University estate (combining History, Heritage, and Geography); research for a History PhD on the early history of the University and its specific role in women's education, a series of small cataloguing, collections management and exhibition projects for Undergraduate students, and a performance project with our Drama students, set on campus and drawing from the archive.

The University Archive is now formally recognised as one of our teaching resources and there is part-time professional archive assistant in post.

This is just one of a number of such collaborations with W&SHC over recent years.

- The History Centre has provided a range of placement opportunities for our MA Heritage Management students • The History Centre runs orientation and demystification sessions for our undergraduate students, who have used the archive for creative projects, in History and in other disciplines • The University is a frequent contributor to W&SHC conferences (e.g. Artists in the Archive in 2013) • The partnership has led to further collaborations with artists and other archives (e.g. Animating the Archive with Salisbury Cathedral Archive in 2017). Section 4 Developing collaborative working Once the hard work has gone in to developing relationships and building trust between individuals and organisations, the opportunities for building on collaboration grow. There are two particular aspects to think about:

1. How to build on a successful collaboration.

2. How to embed collaboration within your organisation.

### 4.1 Building on collaboration

You may find that collaborative working becomes easier as your experience increases: you have trusted partners, a track record, experience of processes, and the encouragement of your parent body. But it is important to balance your enthusiasm for new projects with new risks associated with increased complexity.

Research by *OCLC research* suggests that collaboration takes place along a continuum(^1). The ‘collaboration continuum’ identifies five phases to collaboration, starting with contact and moving through cooperation, coordination, and collaboration to convergence.

The collaboration continuum offers a framework for thinking about the development of collaborative working. Figure 1 (below) gives examples of how each phase might manifest in collaborative working between the archive and higher education sectors. Each phase (from left to right across the diagram) involves greater commitment from each party and brings with it an increased need to formalise working practices as well as potentially greater benefits and risk. For each new venture it is important that you go through the planning checklist (section 3) to consider the goals, benefits, processes and resources involved.

Moving towards convergence on the collaboration continuum, a number of archive and HE organisations have established shared services, transforming their approach to service delivery and the way that they work together.

______________________________________________________________________

(^1) Zorich, et al. (2008) ‘Beyond the Silos of the LAMs: Collaboration Among Libraries, Archives and Museums’, OCLC research. Collaboration Continuum

Contact

Co-operation

Co-ordination

Collaboration

Convergence

Open up dialogue, explore commonalities and need

Agree to work informally on an activity or effort that offers a small yet tangible benefit

Activities no longer ‘ad hoc’ and need a framework to organise networks and ensure common understanding of responsibilities

Moves beyond agreement to a shared process of creation to create a shared understanding that none previously possessed or could have come to on their own

Collaboration around a specific function has become so extensive and engrained that it is no longer recognised by others as a collaborative understanding

Figure 1: Phases of the collaboration continuum, adapted from ‘Beyond the Silos of the LAMs: Collaboration Among Libraries, Archives and Museums’, OCLC Research, 2008, p. 1

The following case studies demonstrate how collaborative projects have developed and resulted in mutual benefits for the organisation involved. Case study 5

Title: The Hull History Centre: Convergence – operating a shared service Archive: Hull City Archives and Local Studies Library HEI: University of Hull Theme: Creating a shared service

The Hull History Centre provides access to material held by the City Archives & Local Studies Library, and Hull University Archives.

The idea of creating a service run jointly by the City Council and University of Hull was first mooted in 1995 when both parties found that they were running out of space for storage and engagement activities, the HLF existed as a possible funding source, both parties recognized that they would have a greater chance of success in attracting funding if they worked together, and they were able to identify high-level and long-term synergies from operating a joint service.

The parent organisations identified high-level strategic goals in common. Both organisations sought to contribute to improving the reputation of the city, increase social capital and educational attainment, and attract external investment. Working together was recognised as a means of achieving these goals.

The joint service is run as a partnership – the Hull History Centre is not a legal entity in its own right, staff are employed by either the City Council or University. Working structures and relationships were defined and established during the development phase. The new joint service was defined from scratch, with processes established for its operation, using good practice from each of the three existing services, setting boundaries and clarifying overlaps.

There is a strong single-service approach to delivery so that front-of-house operates as a single team – users interact with History Centre staff and collections. Some ‘behind the scenes’ aspects of operation remain separate, in particular custodianship and collection management. Depositor agreements and relationships are with either the City Council or University and the two organisations operate separate collection management systems (and have separate repository codes), merging data for a single on-line search interface. What worked?

- The role of individuals during the project initiation phase was critical – to advocate, build and maintain momentum.

- During the design phase (which included an architectural competition) and build phase both the University Archivist and the City Archivist were clear about what was needed to provide a successful service and given sufficient autonomy to define requirements and specification for staff, collections and public areas.

- The partnership is based on collaboration at all levels, strategic, management and operational. It is not reliant on a separate legal entity. It means that the role of individuals remains crucial.

- All three sites closed for either a year or six months before the formal opening of the new building – this was essential for collections work and to enable knowledge exchange and team building. Staff were coming together to work on new (neutral) territory and team leaders were explicit about the need to become familiar with each other’s collections and develop mutual trust.

- The building is popular and there is a strong sense of ownership by the local community which is reflected in its use.

- More outreach and engagement activities are possible as a consequence of the new building. Case study 6

Title: From cooperation to coordination - developing collaborative working

Archive: Aberdeen City & Aberdeenshire Archives and the National Records of Scotland

HEI: Aberdeen University

Theme: Developing collaborative practice

Aberdeen City Archives holds the Aberdeen Burgh Records (volumes 1-8 of which are recognised by UNESCO as of outstanding importance). A proof-of-concept project was set up involving the City Archives, the National Records of Scotland and Aberdeen University to make these records available to a wider public. As a result of this project, the collaborative activity developed into two distinct pilot projects each of which built on different aspects of the original ‘cooperation’ phase.

What happened?

In what might be described as the ‘cooperation’ phase, the National Records of Scotland provided digital camera facilities for the imaging of the earliest 25 volumes (amounting to 16,000 TIFF images) of the Burgh Records and facilitated free public access to the images online via the ScotlandsPlaces website.

Moving to the ‘coordination’ phase, the Research Institute of Irish and Scottish Studies at Aberdeen University then approached the Archives with a proposed pilot project, ‘Connecting and Projecting Aberdeen’s Burgh Records’, to employ (and fund) a research assistant for 6 months to transcribe and translate a sample of 100 consecutive pages of the digitised records and test the creation of an online, publicly accessible database linking the transcriptions and translations to corresponding images.

The work, and any potential future projects were supported by an MoU which clarifies the areas of collaboration, methods of collaboration and issues such as copyright.

______________________________________________________________________

2 Connecting and Projecting Aberdeen’s Burgh Records, Accessible at: www.abdn.ac.uk/riiss/about/pilots-138.php 3 The pilot database is accessible at: www.abdn.ac.uk/aberdeen-burgh-records-database/ Subsequent to this, a distinct but related pilot project was undertaken by the Department of Computing Science at Aberdeen University (funded by dot.rural, the RCUK Digital Economy Hub) to explore the development of a text analytic tool that could be applied to the 100-page transcription. The aim was to make the resources machine-readable, enhance searchability and support the development of linked data applications.

**What worked?**

- Each partner brought specific skills to the collaboration to create something which no one partner could have achieved on their own.

- The pilot projects have enabled the testing of key elements of the work and provide evidence to support future, larger grant applications.

- The involvement of the University in the collaboration gave access to a wide range of research skills, from historical to information technology.

- Pilot project meetings, academic symposia, and less formal workshops and discussion meetings, fostered regular and constructive dialogue between partners, and other collaborators.

- In relation to these collaborations, opportunities have been (and continue to be) developed to engage undergraduate and postgraduate teaching with the pilot project outputs.

- The realisation of substantive academic outputs, including a collection of essays for a prospective special section of the journal *Urban History*

### 4.2 Embedding collaboration

Embedding collaboration within organisations can be challenging because it often requires shifting relationships from individuals to organisations. Collaborations that rely heavily on relationships between individuals are fragile and risk ending when one of the individuals changes roles or institution. The steps identified in this guidance, such as recognising mutual benefits to the organisations at strategic and operational levels, using frameworks to clarify expectations and responsibilities, and ensuring that the reporting requirements of both organisations are met, will help to embed collaboration within organisations.

Identifying ‘champions’ for collaborations from within, and outside of, organisations can also contribute to their sustainability. Many collaborations between organisations start as a single project, often with specific funding attached. Building a network of advocates and using them to promote the benefits of your collaborative work can help to raise the profile of activities with a wider range of stakeholders than you would be able to achieve as individual organisations. This can help to make the case for funding for further projects or ideally, to embed the collaboration into the core working practices of the organisations (as identified in the collaboration and convergence phases of the collaboration continuum).

Issues of sustainability not only apply to relationships and funding but also to the outputs of distinct collaborative projects, particularly digital resources and websites. Careful planning needs to go into the funding, maintenance, and management of these resources once a project has officially ended. 4.3 Opportunities for future collaboration

The research underpinning this guidance asked individuals to identify what they see as the future opportunities for collaboration between archive services and HEIs and these are:

- Uncatalogued material
- Higher education frameworks
- Beyond the Humanities
- Digitised content

Each of these will now be examined in turn.

4.3.1 Uncatalogued material

Uncatalogued archive collections present unique opportunities for carrying out original research on primary source material. This is attractive to many academics as they are evaluated on the originality of their research. Although archive services may be reluctant to provide access to such material for reasons of security and possibly preservation, research based on such collections can also bring considerable benefits to the archive service including the listing of the collections, specialist information about them and exposure of them to wider audiences.

4.3.2 Higher education frameworks

Detailed below are three key higher education frameworks can help drive and develop collaboration between the archive and higher education sector.

Research Excellence Framework (REF) – This framework is intended to measure outputs and impact of higher education research, and specifically requires institutions to consider academic, economic, and societal impact. Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework (TEF) – This framework measures various elements of higher education teaching, student experience, and student outcomes.

Knowledge Exchange Framework (KEF) – This framework is driven by the desire for knowledge exchange across the higher education, public, and private sectors.

The most obvious framework to which archives can contribute is the REF, with its focus on research. However, archives and archivists should take time to fully understand the TEF and KEF frameworks. In particular, as the TEF becomes more established there will be more opportunities for archives to work with HEIs to improve student experience and employability outcomes.

Section 5 of this guide explains these frameworks in more detail.

4.3.3 Beyond the humanities

The use of archive collections to support historical research and other branches of the arts and humanities is relatively widespread. However, there is potential for collections to be used to engage in collaborative research in other areas, notably science, social sciences, technology, mathematics, engineering and medicine, business studies and management subjects, and to support art & design related subject areas such as graphic design, textile design, publishing and social media.

Identifying opportunities ‘beyond the humanities’ may seem daunting if you do not have established contacts or relationships in these areas. Many HEIs and departments have dedicated sector ‘brokers’ who are responsible for bringing together HEIs and other organisations. Take time to identify who these are and make contact with them.

The case study below, from the Cornwall Records Office, Falmouth University, and the University of Exeter (Penryn Campus), shows how archive and universities worked together to promote the use of archives as conceptual; and creative sources for textile and design development. Case Study 7

Title: Making: Archives

Archives: The Archive and Special Collections: Falmouth University and the University of Exeter (Penryn Campus), Cornwall Record Office

HEI: Falmouth University, University of Exeter (Penryn Campus)

Source: Hannah Maughan MA (RCA), Senior Lecturer, BA (Hons) Textile Design

Theme: Archives as creative sources, textile design, print, weave, mixed media

The Textile Design course at Falmouth University runs a 7 week External Engagement module for 2nd year students, which includes the Making: Archives option. The project encourages students to consider the potential of non-textile based archives as conceptual and creative sources for textile and design development. The Archive and Special Collections service at the Penryn Campus manages collections for both Falmouth University and University of Exeter.

The project is a co-created collaboration between the course academics and archive team on the Penryn campus. The purpose of the project was to challenge students to work off-line with primary object based resources and to challenge perceived notion of archives. It also aimed to showcase and promote the Universities archival resources as a conceptual and creative resource to inform contemporary design.

Because of the project, students’ engagement with the archives has transformed their perception of archives, their use and creative potential; they no longer viewed the archives as a theoretical/essay writing resource only. Pedagogical development and methodologies developed over the course of the project have provided academic research for published papers, including the innovative/collaborative working relationship between the archive team and academics. Other outputs include:

- spin off practical stitch workshops working directly from the archival materials
- student exhibitions
- commissions and competition wins • work placements with the archive team • deposits of selected student work back into the archive, building on the resource.

The project has been in running for 4 years, and in 2018 it was extended to include Cornwall Record Office (CRO) who hold the county’s vast archives. CRO are currently being rehoused into a new multi-million-pound building, Kresen Kernow, and students were invited to design fabrics and artefacts for the interior space.

*Making: Archives* continues to evolve, seeking opportunities for further collaborations, to upscale the project across the University and beyond.

Maddie McCollin’s *Making: Archive* project, in response to the Nick Darke archive, won a Gorsedh Kernow Gold Medal for Creativity in 2017. Photographer Alexander Fleming

### 4.3.4 Digitised content

Research and learning opportunities may be based on archival material that has been digitised, or it may support the process of digitising collections. For example, research and learning based on digitised content can take place over greater geographical distances and are not limited to local HEIs; it could also take place through groups of geographically dispersed HEIs. It can enable researchers and students to visually access source material without the need to travel. Similarly, geographically dispersed collections or items can be ‘digitally reunited’ and made available for research.

Other opportunities for collaboration could involve working with HEIs to create and enhance digitised content. For example, academics may be able to contribute their expertise to niche subject areas to enhance metadata and catalogue descriptions; or to inform future digitisation priorities by identifying collections of significant research value.

4.3.5 Digital humanities

The digital humanities are the application of computer technology to enable research in the humanities. Advanced technology-related methods such as text-mining, data-mining, data visualisation and information retrieval are used in arts and humanities research to analyse born-digital and digitised content. Digital humanities research and teaching has grown significantly over the last ten years. For some academics they are seen as the natural ‘next step’ in humanities research and for others it is a subject area in its own right and highly interdisciplinary.

For archive services, this area of research offers opportunities to explore and represent collections in new ways. Much work is based around using technology to manipulate, process and analyse text. Other examples include the use of imaging techniques to reveal information from damaged texts illegible to the naked eye, or the application of ‘digital forensics’ to (born) digital collections to investigate evidence from the past and to support the preservation of digital content for the future.

______________________________________________________________________

4 For example, refer back to the case study of Aberdeen University and Aberdeen City & Aberdeenshire Archives and the development of the text analytic tool applied to the Aberdeen Burgh Records.

5 For example, Multispectral imaging of Magna Carta at the British Library [http://britishlibrary.typepad.co.uk/collectioncare/2014/10/800-year-old-magna-carta-manuscript-reveals-its-secrets.html](http://britishlibrary.typepad.co.uk/collectioncare/2014/10/800-year-old-magna-carta-manuscript-reveals-its-secrets.html)

6 For example, the Digital Lives project at the British Library, UCL and University of Bristol, [www.webarchive.org.uk/wayback/archive/20120131152411/http://www.bl.uk/digital-lives/](http://www.webarchive.org.uk/wayback/archive/20120131152411/http://www.bl.uk/digital-lives/) To attract digital humanities researchers and exploit these possibilities, archive services need to understand how to make data available so that it can be used effectively. Whilst many archives have digital images, there is scope for other forms of digital data to be utilised in the field of digital humanities, and potential opportunities for physical collections to be explored and utilised using digital technologies. Archive services should consider their approach to the management, preservation, and licensing of digital material so that it supports easy and shared access to material across collections and institutions, and delivery through systems that allow access at scale.

If some of this sounds out-of-reach at the moment, remember that collaboration with academics working in the field of digital humanities may provide a route to developing the infrastructure that will support the process. Digital humanists are motivated by many of the same things as researchers in other fields: originality of research, attracting research funding, opportunities to publish scholarly outputs, demonstrating impacts of their research beyond higher education, and providing experience for students. They are looking for opportunities to adapt and apply new technology to the humanities, drawing on technologies emerging from science, computing, information management, and engineering (and providing a useful bridge to these disciplines). It is worth spending time looking at examples of digital humanities research to improve your understanding of what digital humanities means to you or your archive service. Some links are provided in the ‘key terms, concepts and resources’ section.

**Case Study 8**

**Title:** Not another database: digital humanities in action\
**Archives:** Aberdeen City & Aberdeenshire Archives\
**HEI:** University of Aberdeen, Research Institute of Irish and Scottish Studies\
**Source:** Dr Jackson Armstrong, Deputy Head of School of Divinity, History & Philosophy\
**Theme:** Interdisciplinary collaboration: Archives, History and Computing Science

The first eight volumes of the Aberdeen Council Registers, covering the period 1398-1511 are Scotland’s oldest and most complete run of civic records. The registers have been inscribed on the UNESCO UK Memory of the World Register, in recognition of their historical significance.

Funded by a three-year grant (2016-19) from the Leverhulme Trust, the project ‘Law in the Aberdeen Council Registers 1398-1511’ (LACR) is creating a Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) compliant transcription from these volumes, amounting to some 1.75 million words of Middle Scots and Latin.

This is not a conventional digitisation project. High-quality images already exist and the aim of this project is not to produce a database. Instead, the goal is to create a digital textual resource from the registers, which is as open as possible to future analysis.

LACR involved a team of third-year Computing Science students to develop, as part of their degree study, a prototype web-based platform to present and search the LACR resource. LACR co-investigator Dr Adam Wyner supervised the students.

A second group of third-year History students led by LACR principal investigator Dr Jackson Armstrong, undertook a field trip to the City Archives, participated in a seminar with LACR Postdocs who ran an exercise which included palaeography, Middle Scots language, and the ‘genre’ of a register entry.

Finally, the History and Computing students together conducted an evaluative exercise of the prototype platform, in which the History students performed a range of tests designed and run by the Computing students.

The Computing Science student team reported: ‘It was an extremely enlightening experience … to be part of such an interesting project. Being part of such an expansive domain - digital humanities - gave our team the chance to build something that we believe can have a big impact’. The LACR resource in due course will be hosted by Aberdeen City Council, starting from the prototype platform built by the students.

4.3.6 AHRC Collaborative Doctoral Partnerships (CDPs)

Collaborative Doctoral Partnerships (CDP) were established in 2012 and developed out of original Collaborative Doctoral Awards programme (CDA). CDAs are now a central element of the Doctoral Training Partnerships and Doctoral Training Partnerships II schemes (see below).

The CDP scheme aims to facilitate collaboration between HEI’s and a range of non-HEI cultural organisations, including museums, libraries, archives, and heritage organisations. Successful candidates are jointly supervised by subject specialists at both the HEI and non-HEI organisations.

CDP research topics are developed annually by the cultural organisations and HEI’s working collaboratively.

More information Collaborative Doctoral Partnerships can be found at: http://www.ahrc-cdp.org

Case Study 9

Title: ‘Women in Chancery: An Analysis of Chancery as a Court of Redress for Women in Late Seventeenth Century England’.

Archives: The National Archives (TNA)

HEI: University of Hull

Source: Dr Amanda Capern & Dr Amanda Bevan

Theme: Historical research (legal, social, economic, gender), cataloguing, doctoral/ECR training.

Summary: AHRC Collaborative Doctoral Partnership via The Thames Consortium (AH/M004384/1). Principal Investigators Dr Amanda Capern (Senior Lecturer in Early Modern History) and Dr Amanda Bevan (Principal Records Specialist [Legal Records] at TNA). The collaborative research was conducted 2014-2017 and made valuable first use of fully-searchable digitised metadata for Chancery pleadings in collection C 5 (Bridges). The research considerably enhanced knowledge and understanding of the bureaucratic organization of the court of Chancery and equity law and the social practices of early-modern English litigation.

Research outcomes: exciting outcomes included a bank of quantitative data on women’s property holding and litigation in late seventeenth-century England revealing some of the structural reasons for historical gender inequality; new research relationships forged between TNA and the Gender, Place and Memory research team at the University of Hull; digital tagging and checking catalogue metadata for the Equity Project at TNA, opening up academic and public access to large-scale data; public engagement work through blogs and workshops; deep levels of archivist engagement with the records providing new opportunities at TNA (now an Independent Research Organisation); multiple conference presentations by both PIs and the doctoral student; 2 book chapters and 1 peer-reviewed journal article; benefits accrued to the postgraduate student through the dual expertise in the supervision of the doctorate and training in multiple interdisciplinary and cross-professional skills (PhD submitted and full cognate employment attained in 2018).

Future plans: further publications including one methodological peer-reviewed journal article (Bevan and Capern) and a monograph on early-modern Chancery being written during a Leverhulme Fellowship awarded 2018 (Capern); two further grant applications to AHRC including a network grant to bring together at TNA researchers on early-modern law courts.

4.3.7 AHRC Doctoral Training Partnerships (DTP)

Doctoral Training Partnerships (DTPs) are block grant awards made to either individual Research Organisations (ROs), or consortia of ROs. They support postgraduate studentships across the breadth of the AHRC’s subject remit. DTPs provide innovative training environments for doctoral-level research and provide training for research students across the full range of the arts and humanities, as well as across areas of interdisciplinary research located at the boundaries with the sciences and social sciences.

More information on Doctoral Training Partnerships can be found at: https://ahrc.ukri.org/funding/apply-for-funding/archived-opportunities/doctoral-training-partnerships/

4.3.8 Development of cross-sectoral forums to provide access to information on research trends

Identified as a need by both archive practitioners and the higher education community, the development of a resource to bring together information about research interests and under-explored collections could itself form the subject of collaboration between the archive and HE sectors.

4.3.9 Development of income-generating services

Reduced funding presents an opportunity to think creatively about income generation. Opportunities may exist for archives to generate income or investment by providing services to HEIs in areas such as storage and conservation, or the use of public spaces.

An example of a digital archive service that is using its expertise to generate income by charging for the deposit and preservation is the Archaeology Data Service (ADS)(^7). ADS manages and provides access to digital resources that are created from archaeological excavation and research by commercial, educational, and public bodies. There may be parallels here with what archive services could develop and provide in collaboration with HEIs.

Some funding streams (such as those related to Knowledge Exchange programmes) include support for enterprise activities and it may not be too great a leap to consider collaborations between archive services, HEIs and business as a route to the development of income generating services or activities. The Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) has invested in encouraging businesses and universities to work together more closely, for example around the commercialisation of research and the piloting of geographical ‘University Enterprise Zones’ to increase innovation and growth. Such initiatives may provide opportunities in which archive services can collaborate alongside business and HEIs(^8).

### 4.4 Sources of funding

It is difficult to provide definitive advice on sources of funding as many funders’ aims, objectives, and programmes change overtime. The information in this section should be considered a signpost to potential funding streams, and you should always research and identify the most relevant and up-to-date funding streams to support potential collaborators.

Through the ‘Fundraising for Archives’ programme (which concluded in Spring 2018) The National Archives have produced toolkits and sources of advice that can be downloaded. These can be found at: [http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/archives-sector/projects-and-programmes/fundraising-for-archives/](http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/archives-sector/projects-and-programmes/fundraising-for-archives/)

Some trusts, foundations and the Heritage Lottery Fund will support collaborative projects between the archive and higher education sectors. For example, the Leverhulme Trust which funds the Artist in Residence grants(^9), and Arcadia, which provides grants to support endangered cultural heritage and enable

______________________________________________________________________

(^7) Archaeology Data Service, available at: [http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/about/background](http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/about/background)

(^8) Department for Business, Innovation & Skills investment in research, development and innovation: [www.gov.uk/government/policies/investing-in-research-development-and-innovation](http://www.gov.uk/government/policies/investing-in-research-development-and-innovation)

(^9) The Leverhulme Trust: [www.leverhulme.ac.uk/funding/funding.cfm](http://www.leverhulme.ac.uk/funding/funding.cfm) open access to the materials\\textsuperscript{10}. Many archive services are well acquainted with fundraising from trusts and foundations and as these sources tend not to be specific to funding collaboration with HEIs, they are not elaborated on in this guidance document.

The higher education sector has access to funding streams that, whilst unavailable to archive services in terms of making direct applications to the funds, can be used to support collaborative work. Developing your knowledge of these opportunities and the requirements of the funders will help you to understand the context in which HEIs are developing research bids and other programmes of activity. It may also alert you to specific funding calls (areas of research) to which your archive service can contribute and prompt you to make contact with an HEI with which you can collaborate.

**Research Councils** are the most significant funding streams for academic research in the UK and may offer opportunities for cross-sector collaborative funding. Following the Higher Education and Research Act (2017) a new body, **United Kingdom Research and Innovation (UKRI)**, was established, bringing together the seven existing research councils, Innovate UK, and creating Research England. Each research council has a specific focus. The seven research councils are:

- Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC)
- Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC)
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC)
- Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)
- Medical Research Council (MRC)
- Natural Environment Research Council (NERC)
- Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC)

Innovate UK is focused on research and development between higher education, business, and supports the Knowledge Transfer Programme (KTP). Research UK oversee UKRI England focused research and funding priorities.

\\textsuperscript{10} Arcadia grant funding: [www.arcadiafund.org.uk/about-arcadia/about-arcadia.aspx](http://www.arcadiafund.org.uk/about-arcadia/about-arcadia.aspx) The **AHRC (Arts and Humanities Research Council)** is one of the most significant funders of projects involving archive services or research on archive collections. The AHRC issues periodic targeted funding calls as well as operating open calls throughout the year. Archive services cannot apply directly for funding (unless they have Independent Research Organisation status) but they can be partners in funded research projects. Partners are usually expected to make an in-kind (or cash) contribution to the research project but the project can be designed to include funded public engagement activities, such as exhibitions or learning programmes, which may be of benefit to the archive service. Alternatively, the archive service can act as a consultant to the HEI (rather than a partner in the project).

To explore the research council funding opportunities archives and archivists should visit the relevant research council website.

**The British Academy** is the UK’s national body for the humanities and social sciences. One of its principle roles is funding that supports new UK and international humanities and social sciences research. More information can be found at https://www.britac.ac.uk/funding-opportunities

The sources identified above give an overview of some of the major sources of funding available to support collaborations between the archive and higher education sectors. Interdisciplinary research and partnership working is popular amongst almost all funders at the moment and archive services are in a strong position to contribute their knowledge, experience and source material to collaborative projects. Many funders provide e-bulletins that you can sign up to receive news about forthcoming calls. Even if your archive service is not able to apply directly for the funding available, it is useful to know which themes are being funded so that you can target your approach to higher education institutions that may be interested in working on projects with you.

The **Leverhulme Trust** awards grants and scholarships for the support of research and education. It was established by the Will of William Hesketh Lever and is ‘one of the largest all-subject providers of research funding in the UK’. More information can be found at https://www.leverhulme.ac.uk The **Wellcome Trust** is a global charitable foundation which supports scientists and researchers. Funding schemes support individuals, teams, resources, seed ideas, places and major initiatives in the following areas: biomedical science, population health, product, development and applied research, humanities and social science and public engagement and creative industries. More information can be found at: [https://wellcome.ac.uk/funding](https://wellcome.ac.uk/funding)

At present there may be opportunities for funding from European sources, for instance through Horizon 2020, though it is unknown whether continued access will be available after 2019.

As a first port of call for funding advice and to navigate funding opportunities, including those available to support collaborative working with HEIs, contact the Archive Sector Development Team at The National Archives, [asd@nationalarchives.gov.uk](mailto:asd@nationalarchives.gov.uk). Section 5 Recording activities and capturing impact The different motivations for collaboration between the archive and HE sectors are reflected in variations in the way the two sectors measure the success of their activities. Understanding how each sector records and evaluates their activities will help partners to plan for the collection of appropriate data at the outset of collaborations. It will enable partners to support each other in the promotion of their work.

When resources are limited it is particularly important to be able to report on the results of investment and to be able to make a strong, evidenced argument for future investment.

Perhaps the biggest single difference in approach is that archive services often measure their activities as a way of benchmarking performance and demonstrating value for money. Whereas HEIs are required to have their performance assessed on the wider impact that their research is having, how their teaching supports learning and students, how their activities demonstrate the value of their funding, and as part of the basis on which funding is allocated through the higher education funding councils.

This guide looks in turn at the methods of assessment used by the archive sector and the HE sector and suggests where there is common ground between the two sectors.

5.1 Archive services measurements

Archive services have a tradition of recording outputs quantitatively and often report on key statistics such as those required for the archive service accreditation standard (see Figure 2 below). These have been designed to align with CIPFA statistics(^\\text{11}).

This type of data is relatively easy to collect but does rely on conscientious and regular recording of information. It is useful because it can be used:

- to benchmark or compare activity against similar services
- to analyse trends when collected repeatedly

(^{11}) CIPFA (The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy)

- as an indicator of performance
- to support arguments made about cost effectiveness and value for money
- for forward planning
- to report at management meetings or in annual reports where short and succinct snapshots of activity are valuable.

Figure 2. Guidance for measuring the public and other use of collections (from the Archive Service Accreditation Guidance, p.6-7 of 2018 revised edition)

| Use of resources | Guidance | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 1 Total number of visitors of all kinds to site in the last year | Count readers only once a day; exclude visiting groups, guided tours which belong in question 5 | | 2 Of visitors included above, how many were using the archival resources for their own study? | Calculate according to the method usually employed by the service (unit of production whatever size); include only archival documents. Please indicate the method of calculation used. | | 3 Number of items produced in the last year | Include all sizes of displays/exhibition and all appearances new or repeat | | 4 Number of appearances in exhibitions in the last year | Include all events held on own premises and branch offices, including visiting groups and guided tours | | 5 Number of learning events held in-house in the last year | Include events held at libraries, town centres, museums, fairs etc. | | 6 Number of learning events held outside in the last year | Total attendance at events noted under 5&6 | | 7 Total attendance at learning events in the last year | On or related to documentary holdings, requiring an answer and originating outside the archive service’s parent body. | | 8 Enquiries received by post, email and telephone in the last year | A visit is defined as a session of activity/series of one or more page impressions, served to one user, to the archive website. A unique visitor is determined by the IP address or cookie. The session is deemed to | end when there is a lengthy gap of usage between successive page impressions for that user. An example of a lengthy gap would be a gap of at least 30 minutes. Count one visit per visitor session. Visits to ‘data aggregators’ such as Discovery/Archives Hub should be excluded.

| | Estimated number of page impressions and user visits to office’s online research resources hosted by commercial providers in the last year | This question will not apply to internal figures | |---|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------| | 10 | Estimated number of page impressions and user visits to the archive service’s online catalogues in the last year | | | 11 | Number of times moving image material contributed to screenings | Includes broadcast and screening events |

Archive services may complement this type of statistical information by taking part in surveys such as the ‘ARA National Surveys Group ‘Survey of Visitors’ and the ‘Survey of Distance Users of Enquiry Services’. Both surveys gather information about why people visit/use archives, reveal information about visitors/users and record information about their satisfaction with services.

Further benchmarking of archives is available through the ‘Taking Part’ survey(^\\text{12}), a National Statistic produced by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport that provides evidence of participation in the cultural sector.

### 5.2 Higher Education Institutions measurements

The Higher Education sector measures (or is measured against) three main areas:

1. accountability for the way that it spends public money
2. the quality of its research

(^{12}) Taking Part, available at: [www.gov.uk/government/collections/taking-part](http://www.gov.uk/government/collections/taking-part) 3. student satisfaction.

Annual accountability returns are required from HEIs by the higher education funding councils to demonstrate accountability for funding and cover operational aspects of the performance of HEIs such as financial performance and governance.

5.2.1 The Research Excellence Framework (REF)

REF is the system for assessing the quality of research in UK higher education institutions. It has a major impact on research rankings and funding allocations for higher education institutions and is therefore of critical importance to them. The REF, which replaced the Research Assessment Exercise, was developed between 2007 and 2011, with the first iteration reporting in 2014 (REF2014\\textsuperscript{13}). The next iteration of REF will be in 2021 (REF2021)

There are two core assessment criteria within the REF:

- **Reach**: the size and scale of the impact upon individuals, communities, organisations and environments
- **Significance**: the degree to which the impact has enriched, influenced, informed or changed policies, practices and behaviors

REF submissions must be accompanied by case studies outlining research impact. The REF case study database\\textsuperscript{14} used eight summary impact types: political, health, technological, economic, legal, cultural, societal and environmental impacts, to show the different ways in which research can be impactful.

An analysis of REF2014, a review by Lord Stern and consultation with the Higher Education sector, has contributed to the next round of REF which will conclude in 2021 (REF2021\\textsuperscript{15}).

\\textsuperscript{13} https://www.ref.ac.uk/2014/ \\textsuperscript{14} http://impact.ref.ac.uk/CaseStudies/ \\textsuperscript{15} http://www.ref.ac.uk REF assessment elements

There are three elements to REF assessment: outputs, impact and environment. The weighing for each area is outlined in the chart below.

Research outputs account for the largest component of the assessment (60%). The REF assessment framework describes research outputs as follows:

“In addition to printed academic work, research outputs may include, but are not limited to: new materials, devices, images, artefacts, products and buildings; confidential or technical reports; intellectual property, whether in patents or other forms; performances, exhibits or events; work published in non-print media.” (p. 22 para.106).

These outputs, therefore, are what HEIs are looking to produce through their research and, by extension, through any collaborative research project with archive services.

Research impact accounts for 25% of the assessment. United Kingdom Research and Innovation (UKRI), state that impact ‘is the demonstrable contribution that excellent research makes to society and the economy’(^\\text{16}).

(^{16}) UKRI Excellence with Impact webpage = https://www.ukri.org/innovation/excellence-with-impact/ - May 2018 This may occur in many ways:

- creating and sharing new knowledge and innovation
- inventing new products, companies, and jobs
- developing new or improving existing public services and policy
- and enhancing quality of life and health

UKRI state that economic and societal impact can be defined as the following:

- demonstrable contributions that excellent social and economic research makes to society and the economy, of benefit to individuals, organisations and nations. This is measured in the REF.

In REF2021 there is a continued emphasis on collaboration in the impact assessment.

The inclusion of economic and societal impact in the evaluation of higher education research enables HEIs to demonstrate wider accountability for the public money they receive for funding research, particularly its economic and societal benefits; and offers opportunities for the archive sector to collaborate with higher education sector to demonstrate and evidence this impact.

The research environment accounts for the remaining 15% of the assessment. This element of the REF considers the strength of the research environment including research strategy, culture and infrastructure, and measures such as research income and degrees awarded.

There are opportunities in the REF for archive services and HEI’s to develop mutually beneficial collaborations. Understanding this process, and the opportunities that exist for archive services to enhance the work of HEIs in this area, is essential for archives to benefit from research council funded archive-HE collaborations.

Archive services, even those located within HEIs, cannot contribute directly to the REF, but examples of their work can be included in the impact case studies that are submitted by HEIs as part of their REF submissions. More information on REF2021 can be found at [www.ref.ac.uk](http://www.ref.ac.uk). This site also has links to REF2014 results and case studies.

**Citation**

One of the challenges for archive services is to ensure that their contribution to collaborative work is visible in the way that academic work is published and assessed so that they gain profile for the collections and the organisation. Citation is an important mechanism through which academic sources are credited. Counting the number of times an author, article (or other source) is cited is seen as a measure of the impact of the source, particularly in Science Technology Engineering Mathematics (STEM) subjects. The importance of the journal in which an article is published (the journal ranking) may also carry weight.

Archive services should provide clear guidance on how to reference source material and how to reference their organisation so that it is cited consistently. The research supporting this guidance document suggests that the archive sector does not commonly use bibliometrics (statistical analysis of books, publications and literature). Investigating some of the bibliometric tools that are available to track citations would provide a mechanism for tracking and collating academic access to archives.

During 2018 The National Archives and RLUK are conducting research in archive citations in the Citation Capture project. This will examine the occurrences and context of archive citations and should enable archives services more fully to demonstrate how they support Higher Education Institutions, academics, researchers, and research outputs and impact. The project is due for completion in September 2018.

**5.2.2 Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework (TEF)**

The TEF aims to recognise excellent teaching in UK higher education providers with gold, silver, or bronze ratings. Until 2018, TEF was voluntary, though in future all HEIs in England with over 500 students will have to take part; in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland it will remain voluntary. The TEF draws on nationally collected data to measure the performance of higher education providers in the following areas:

- **Student satisfaction** - How satisfied students are with their course, as measured by responses to the National Student Survey (NSS).

- **Continuation** - The proportion of students that continue their studies from year to year, as measured by data collected by the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA).

- **Employment outcomes** - What students do after they graduate, as measured by responses to the *Destination of Leavers from Higher Education survey* (DLHE).

In addition to this, data on student characteristics, provider’s location and provision, and submitted written evidence illustrating the HEI’s performance and case for excellence are also considered.

The TEF may incentivise HEIs and archives to work together on collaborative projects that enrich the student experience and employability. It may also provide archives with an opportunity to engage with new audiences and be exposed to new thinking, ideas, and approaches to the use and utilisation of their collections, services, and expertise.

### 5.2.3 Knowledge Exchange Framework (KEF)

The Knowledge Exchange Framework (KEF) seeks to increase the efficiency and effectiveness in the use of public funding for knowledge exchange. It aims to support and further a culture of continuous improvement in Higher Education Knowledge Exchange.

The KEF is managed by UKRI and there are two key strands to the Knowledge Exchange Framework – Principles and Metrics. Elements of KEF are still in development (May 2018), and the principles agreed are

- Inspiring universities and business to work together for growth and prosperity.

- Technology transfer and intellectual property. • Encouraging collaborative research between universities and companies.

• Utilisation of physical assets – such as science parks, incubators, and university facilities and equipment – beyond higher education institutions.

• Developing student, academic, and institutional entrepreneurship.

• Developing opportunities for continued professional development opportunities, short course, lifelong learning, career guidance, work placement, curriculum development, and project experiences between higher education institutions and economic and societal bodies.

• Advancing opportunities for outreach, volunteering, social cohesion, community regeneration, widening participation, and involving the public in research

KEF Metrics are still in development and are planned to be finalised in the autumn of 2018.

5.2.5 The National Student Survey

This survey gathers students’ opinions on the quality of their courses. Again, the purpose is to contribute to accountability for public funding, but survey results are also used by students to help inform their choice of university, and by HEIs not only in their publicity material to attract students but also as a mechanism to reflect on and enhance student experience. The NSS contributes to higher education institutions TEF ranking (see above).

5.3 Evaluating collaborative activities: finding common ground

When planning your approach to evaluating collaborative activities you need to be clear about what you are setting out to achieve through the collaboration (the aims and objectives), what indicators (or information) you need to collect to show that progress is being made towards achieving those objectives, and how you will use the information you collect (for example, the audience to which you are reporting). The work that archive services do to evaluate public engagement or learning activities is likely to resonate much more strongly with HEIs than the collection of statistical data. Indeed, you may find that your experience of evaluation of public engagement and learning is one of the main contributions you can make to a collaborative project.

If you are not familiar with evaluation techniques, a number of organisations provide useful guidance and toolkits, including: the Heritage Lottery Fund, Arts Council England’s Inspiring Learning for All, Museum Development Programmes, and Research Councils UK (see key terms, concepts and resources for links). The techniques are commonly applied to understanding areas such as learning, enjoyment and skills development.

The assessment of impact goes further than evaluating outcomes and is a significant element that HEIs activity is measured on in the REF and TEF (see above). The significant difference is that impact describes the broader or longer-term effects of activities and outcomes, normally on people but sometimes also on policy areas.

A great deal of work has been done recently on impact assessment, and there are many different types of impact assessments that can be undertaken (e.g. economic impact assessments, social impact assessments). A good summary of different methods of impact assessment is presented by Simon Tanner as part of his research into, and development of, the Balanced Value Impact Model for digital resources17.

Knowledge of both evaluation techniques and impact assessment methodologies will help you to talk to academics using a common language. At the beginning of any collaboration, you need to any able to communicate what you hope your activities will achieve, and how and who they will benefit. Likewise, it is important to understand what your HEI partner is seeking to achieve and what they want to measure, and how they will measure this. By doing this, you can devise mutually beneficial methods of recording the activities and capturing impact that can be used to demonstrate the success of the collaboration to multiple stakeholders.

17 Tanner, S. (2012) Measuring the Impact of Digital Resources: The Balanced Value Impact Model. King’s College London, October 2012. Available at: www.kdcs.kcl.ac.uk/innovation/impact.html The following case study from Durham University provides an example of how the skills and experience of the library and heritage collections team, which came to light through a high-profile university project, have since benefitted the work of academic colleagues when demonstrating the impact of their research activities.

**Case Study 10**

**Title:** Durham University and Durham University Library and Heritage Collections: using ‘impact’ to raise the profile of heritage collections\
**Archives:** Durham University Library and Heritage Collections\
**HEI:** Durham University\
**Theme:** Supporting the demonstration of impact

Durham University was the leading partner in the project to exhibit the Lindisfarne Gospels at Palace Green Library in 2013. The project was a great success, resulting in 100,000 visits to the exhibition, over 20,000 children participating in learning sessions and workshops and 135,000 people reached through the wider engagement programme.

The Lindisfarne project received HLF funding which enabled an ambitious engagement programme, and staff in the Library and Heritage Collections team used their experience of this project to raise the profile of their work, notably around outreach, learning and engagement and how this can support academic requirements to demonstrate ‘impact’ as part of the REF.

Following the Lindisfarne project a working group with academics from Arts, Humanities and Social Science subjects was set up to advocate how the heritage collections could be used in teaching and research. The working group promoted the work of the Heritage Collections team (for example, running display classes, supporting REF case studies, using research in outreach and engagement work, training academics in outreach and engagement) and produced a leaflet to go to all academics.

A result of this is that exhibitions are now accompanied by an outreach programme. Heritage Collections staff meet with academics to establish what their research is and the key messages they want to get to their key audiences. From there they work together on a joint learning proposals which is then trialled under the supervision of the academic who gives feedback.

The collaboration between the Heritage Collection and academics means that academics are increasing use the heritage collections support and demonstrate their research, and this is used to support REF.

5.4 Raising your profile through collaboration

Raising the profile of archive collections and archive services was one of the benefits of collaboration most frequently cited by archive practitioners in the course of this research. Yet academics identify lack of access to information about archive services and their content as a stumbling block to further use.

It is therefore worth thinking about how you can raise the profile of your archive service to the higher education sector both in advance of collaborative working and as a result of successful collaborations.

The following checklist has been compiled from conversations with archive practitioners and academics.

| Activity | Completed | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Include information about collections in aggregated catalogues and resources such as Discovery, the Archives Hub, and AIM25 where possible. | | | Include information about the variety of material held by the archive service on your website and provide contact details for professional staff who can give greater insight to the collections and their potential for research. | | | Include information about how to access collection material held by your archive service on your website, for example whether appointments are needed, reader registration requirements etc. | | Encourage your academic users to become advocates for your archive service and the collections.

Provide guidelines on how to cite collection material in research and how to refer to your archive service (in an effort to standardise how your organisation is referred to in citation indices).

Ask academics to let you know about publications that arise from research on the collections and if possible, to provide the archive service with a copy of any publication for the collection.

Collect information in quantitative and qualitative form and re-use it in a variety of different contexts from management reporting to public engagement.

Investigate the use of bibliographic data and citation tracking tools as a method of tracking the use of collection material (or references to the archive service) by academics, such as Google Scholar or JSTOR data for research.

Use social media and online tools to promote your collaborative working and any opportunities that you are keen to pursue.

These specific pointers can be reinforced through your general approach to communications. The TNA has produced guidance notes that support the promotion and use of archive services and collections which may be of use to you:

- *Developing Partnerships*(^{18})
- *Developing access and participation*(^{19})
- *Effective communications: raising the profile of your archive service*(^{20})

The advice and guidance cited above provide information that will be useful at the outset of collaborative working (e.g. to support the development of external contacts

______________________________________________________________________

(^{18}) [http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/archives-sector/advice-and-guidance/running-your-organisation/developing-partnerships/](http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/archives-sector/advice-and-guidance/running-your-organisation/developing-partnerships/)

(^{19}) [www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/archives/developing-access-and-participation.pdf](http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/archives/developing-access-and-participation.pdf)

(^{20}) [www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/archives/effective-communications.pdf](http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/archives/effective-communications.pdf) or to gain institutional support for collaborative working) as well as to help you plan how to communicate the success of your collaborations and your future ambitions.

Many contributors to this guidance note reported a ‘virtuous circle’ as a result of their collaborative working, with use of the collections and new audiences growing as a result of their developing reputation for working with academics. Section 6 Key terms, concepts, and resources

- To make a difference to the public
- To encourage participation
- To help make the work I do sustainable
- To improve our knowledge base e.g. collections, audiences
- To access new funding or income streams
- To improve our capacity
- Audience development
- To help publics understand the value of work
- To create a tangible outcome e.g. publication, exhibition, film etc.

### 6.1 Planning Template

| Strategic drivers for collaboration | Archive | HEI | |-------------------------------------|---------|-----|

**Summary of the proposed collaborative activity:**

**Desired outputs and outcomes**

**Benefits to collaborators**

| Archive | HEI | |---------|-----|

**Target audience**

| Archive | HEI | |---------|-----|

**Task**

| Lead person/ organisation | |---------------------------| | Project manager (PM) | | Organising meetings and maintaining project records | | Budget holder/ responsible for financial reporting | | Contract management | | Employment/ management of staff |

**Project sponsors (the decision makers in each organisation)**

| Archive | HEI | |---------|-----|

**Timelines/ key dates relevant to this project? (decision meetings)**

| Archive | HEI | |---------|-----| | Skills required | Resources required | Gaps | |-----------------|--------------------|------| | Costs (including staff time and back office functions) | | | | Archive | HEI | | In-kind Contributions | | | | Archive | HEI | | Insurance implications (policies checked) | VAT status (checked) | Copyright and licensing (checked) | | | | | | Measuring impact: approach | | | | | | | | Disseminating results/ Publication strategy | | | | Method (articles, conference papers, online hosting) | Lead | Timeline | | | | | | Access to collections | | | | Reader registration requirements | Document handling | | Booking appointments | Security and preservation | | University ethics board requirements for research (if relevant) | | |

### 6.2 Profile raising checklist

| Activity | Completed | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Include information about collections in aggregated catalogues and resources such as Discovery, the Archives Hub, and AIM25 where possible. | | | Include information about the variety of material held by the archive service on your website and provide contact details for professional staff who can give greater insight to the collections and their potential for research. | | | Include information about how to access collection material held by your archive service on your website, for example whether appointments are needed, reader registration requirements etc. | | | Encourage your academic users to become advocates for your archive service and the collections. | | | Provide guidelines on how to cite collection material in research and how to refer to your archive service (in an effort to standardise how your organisation is referred to in citation indices). | | | Ask academics to let you know about publications that arise from research on the collections and if possible, to provide the archive service with a copy of any publication for the collection. | | | Collect information in quantitative and qualitative form and re-use it in a variety of different contexts from management reporting to public engagement. | | | Investigate the use of bibliographic data and citation tracking tools as a method of tracking the use of collection material (or references to the archive service) by academics, such as Google Scholar or JSTOR data for research | | | Use social media and online tools to promote your collaborative working and any opportunities that you are keen to pursue. | | 6.3 Key terms and concepts referred to in the guidance

Academia.edu

An online platform that allows academics to share research papers, monitor the impact of their research and track the research of academics they follow. It provides profiles of individual researchers, including their research interests and it facilitates communication between academics.

https://www.academia.edu

Archive sector accreditation

Archive Service Accreditation is the new UK wide standard scheme for archive services, replacing The National Archives' Standard for Record Repositories and its self-assessment programme for local authority archives in England and Wales. The standard defines good practice and identifies agreed standards, thereby encouraging and supporting development. The scheme offers a badge of external recognition and endorsement of their service.

www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/archives-sector/accreditation.htm

Archives Hub

The Archives Hub is an online gateway to the descriptions of archives held in over 220 UK repositories, such as universities, company archives and local history centres deemed to be of value to the UK education and research communities. Descriptions on the Hub vary in the level of depth provided. It generally represents the types of collections you find within higher education, local authority, business and specialist repositories, and includes the archives of people, such as writers, scientists, artists, and politicians, the archives of corporate and institutional bodies such as banks, breweries, universities, manufacturers and theatres, the archives of groups and societies such as charities, pressure groups and religious groups, and the archives of family estates.

www.archiveshub.ac.uk CIPFA (The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy) statistics

CIPFA statistics and research provide information on a range of issues such as service usage, service costs, customer satisfaction and policy development across a range of public sector services, including public libraries and archive services.

www.cipfastats.net/cipfastats/

Digital Humanities

Digital Humanities is a relatively new field of research, and teaching, combining methodologies from the humanities and social sciences with tools provided by computing. Advanced technology-related methods such as text mining, data mining, data visualization and information retrieval are used in arts and humanities research to analyse born-digital and digitised content.

Links to organisations:

Alliance of Digital Humanities Organizations http://adho.org

DH Commons http://dhcommons.org/about (describes itself as an online hub focused on matching digital humanities projects seeking assistance with scholars interested in project collaboration)

Digital Humanities at Oxford http://digital.humanities.ox.ac.uk (particularly the ‘support’ section)

European Association for Digital Humanities http://eadh.org/index.html

King’s College London Digital Humanities Department www.kcl.ac.uk/artshums/depts/ddh/index.aspx

King’s College London Digital Laboratory https://www.kdl.kcl.ac.uk

UCL Centre for Digital Humanities http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dh Discovery (TNA)

Discovery is The National Archives' catalogue, holding more than 32 million records relating to Britain and British history held at The National Archives, around 2,500 archives and institutions across the UK, and some archives and institutions abroad. It includes data from The National Register of Archives and Access to Archives (A2A) which both closed in 2014, the ARCHON Directory and Manorial Documents Register and extensive research guidance. Links:

http://discovery.nationalarchives.org.uk

http://nationalarchives.gov.uk/records/atoz/

Evaluation

There are a number of tools available to help you to understand and carry out evaluations of activities. A selection is listed below:

Heritage Lottery Fund guide to measuring outputs, evaluating outcomes and assessing impact.

www.hlf.org.uk/evaluation-guidance

Inspiring Learning for All: an improvement framework for museums, libraries and archives.

A self-help improvement framework for museums, libraries and archives, enabling organisations to assess strengths and plan improvements, improve strategic and operational performance, and provide evidence of the impact of activities through generic learning and generic social outcomes (GLOs and GSOs). The website includes useful pointers and templates for collecting both quantitative and qualitative data but it is worth remembering that the GSOs were developed in a particular policy context so you may need to update them.

https://www.artscouncil.org.uk/advice-and-guidance/inspiring-learning-all-home-page Impact

Rather than measuring outputs or evaluating outcomes based on targets, impact evaluation assesses the societal or economic benefited (or changes) that can be attributed to a particular project, policy or activity.

Simon Tanner provides a useful overview of impact assessment for cultural heritage organisations in his paper “Measuring the impact of digital resources: The balanced value impact model” alongside the description of the model itself and how to apply it.

www.kdcs.kcl.ac.uk/fileadmin/documents/pubs/BalancedValueImpactModel_SimonTanner_October2012.pdf

JiscMail

A free service that enables groups of individuals to communicate and discuss education, research, and other professional issues using email discussion lists. It includes lists for archivists and librarians, as well as academics and students. Find a list in your field of interest at:

www.jiscmail.ac.uk/groups/

JSTOR data for research

An example of a bibliometric tool for exploring scholarly journal literature (in this case, literature on JSTOR). The category search terms do not make specific provision for entering (or searching) under holding organisation (e.g. archive service) but the resource gives an indication of the data that such tools make available.

http://dfr.jstor.org/

LinkedIn

A social media platform widely used by individuals from all professional spheres. In addition to providing individual profiles and enabling connections between individuals, LinkedIn provides a platform for online discussion forums, for example it has discussion groups for ‘archives professionals’ and for ‘historians, librarians and archivists’. Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs)

A memorandum of understanding (MoU) is an agreement between two or more parties, which commits them to working closely together to support each other’s aims in general, or in relation to particular activities. It is often used in cases where parties either do not imply a legal commitment or in situations where the parties cannot create a legally enforceable agreement. Whether or not a document constitutes a binding contract depends only on the presence or absence of well-defined legal elements in the text proper of the document.

More information on MoUs can is available as part of the suite of guidance from the Share Academy at: https://shareacademy.co.uk/advice-documents

National Student Survey

Commissioned by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and run by Ipsos MORI, this annual survey collects opinions from final year undergraduates on the quality of their Higher Education experience. The survey’s main purpose is to help students choose which institutions to study at. It provides data on students’ satisfaction with teaching, assessment and feedback, academic support, organisation and management, learning resources, personal development and overall satisfaction.

The results are frequently widely publicised in the media and they often help to drive improvements at HEIs.

http://www.thestudentsurvey.com

Partnership agreements

Partnership agreements can provide a useful framework for clarifying how organisations will work together in collaboration. They sometimes are in place of MoUs.

The Heritage Lottery Fund provides guidance on partnership agreements to support one of its funding streams. The document clarifies relationships and expectations for recipients of funding but may still be a useful general reference. A template partnership agreement is provided as appendix 1 of the following guidance document:

www.hlf.org.uk/looking-funding/our-grant-programmes/young-roots

Advice on developing and maintaining partnerships can be found at:

www.hlf.org.uk/forum/developing-and-maintaining-partnerships

Public engagement

Public engagement describes the ways in which the activity and benefits of research can be shared with the public, by definition a two-way process. In this way it differs from outreach which can be interpreted as a one-directional activity.

The National Coordinating Centre for Public Engagement (NCCPE) helps inspire and support universities to engage with the public, providing training, consultancy and a variety of resources, including the EDGE public engagement self-assessment tool.

www.publicengagement.ac.uk

Research Excellence Framework (REF)

The REF is the new system for assessing the quality of research in UK Higher Education Institutions, which has replaced the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE). Through the REF, expert panels assess the academic excellence of research, as well as the impact of research beyond academia. The results are used to determine how future public funding for research is allocated (from 2015-16).

www.ref.ac.uk

ResearchGate

Popular amongst scientists, ResearchGate is an online platform that connects researchers and makes it easy for them to share and access scientific output, knowledge and expertise. 6.4 Useful resources

Archon

The ARCHON Directory listed record repositories in the United Kingdom and overseas with substantial collections of manuscripts noted under the indexes to the National Register of Archives. Data has now been integrated into Discovery.

http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk

AIM25 (Archives in London and the M25 area)

Electronic access to collection level descriptions of the archives of over 100 higher education institutions, learned societies, cultural organisations and livery companies within the greater London area. It does not provide item-level descriptions.

http://www.aim25.ac.uk/

Campaign for Voluntary Sector Archives

The Campaign for Voluntary Sector Archives raises awareness of the importance of voluntary sector archives as strategic assets for governance, corporate identity, accountability and research, and as part of the sector’s wider public benefit responsibility. It encourages all charities, voluntary organisations, trusts and foundations to take responsibility for their archives by providing for their management, preservation, use and promotion. It has produced two pieces of draft guidance for voluntary sector organisations that own or look after archives.

http://www.voluntarysectorarchives.org.uk/

Gateway to Research

A system developed by United Kingdom Research and Innovation (UKRI) to enable users to search and analyse information about publicly funded research. It provides information about current research projects and the outcomes of past projects. You may find it a useful resource to identify which organisations are carrying out research in fields relevant to collections in your archive service, or to find out which organisations have carried out research based on archive collections.

http://gtr.ukri.org/resources/about.html

**Historical Association**

The UK National Charity for History, which provides training and development resources for primary and secondary school history teachers. It works with heritage and public history bodies through the ‘Campaign for History’ and can provide useful communication channels and engagement opportunities for archive services and individuals seeking to make contact with academics and researchers.

http://www.history.org.uk/

**History UK**

History UK is the independent national body promoting and monitoring History in UK Higher Education. It is funded by history departments or their equivalents and campaigns on issues of concern to academic historians and the broader history community, particularly in the following areas:

- The profile of history in higher education and beyond
- The state of the profession, particularly the recruitment and career development of undergraduates, postgraduates, researchers and staff
- Research culture, including the research resources available to historians and the impact of the REF
- Audit culture, to ensure that the demands of external audit and quality measurement are appropriate to the discipline and light in touch

http://www.history-uk.ac.uk

**Institute of Historical Research (IHR)**

The IHR offers a range of onsite and remote services that promote and facilitate excellence in historical research, teaching and scholarship in the UK, by means of its library, seminars, conferences, fellowships, training, and consultancy. It provides a portal for the exchange of ideas and information and current developments in historical scholarship. It is a good source of information on current events and conferences of interest to the academic community of historians and it provides communication channels such as its blog.

www.history.ac.uk

**MASC25: Mapping access to Special Collections in the London Region**

MASC25 is an online resource guide, which brings together collection level descriptions of printed special collections in libraries within the Greater London region. The database complements other resource mapping initiatives, such as AIM25 for archives. It does not provide item-level descriptions.

www.masc25.ac.uk

**Share Academy**

Share Academy was a partnership between University College London, University of the Arts London and the London Museums Group. Its aim was to build sustainable and mutually beneficial relationships between the higher education sector and specialist museums in London.

Its website includes a range of resources that will be of interest to archive services seeking to work with the HE sector including the following advice documents:

- Initiating cross-sector partnerships
- How to plan collaborative projects
- Arranging successful student internships
- Memorandum of understanding guidance
- Guidance on project planning and management

https://shareacademy.co.uk/advice-documents/

**Museum-University Partnership Initiative (MUPI)**

The Museum-University Partnership Initiative (MUPI) was funded by the Arts Council England Museum Resilience Fund and delivered by the National Co-ordinating Centre for Public Engagement (NCCPE) in partnership with the Paddy McNulty Associates and Share Academy project. It ran for two years between October 2016 and 2018, and was built on learning from a successful pilot project from 2016. The MUPI pilot project demonstrated how the higher education sector can be opened up to smaller and medium sized museums whose unique collections and engagement expertise are often an underutilised resource, whilst at the same time adding value to the work of the museums involved and contributing to their long term resilience.

MUPI have published a wide range of resources and guidance to encourage cultural heritage and university partnerships including:

- MUPI Match Guide
- MUPI Purposeful Partnership Cards (Diamond 9 Cards)
- MUPI Conversation Starters scales
- MUPI Partnership Planning cards
- Sector Jargon busters
- University KPIs

These resources can be found at: [http://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/nccpe-projects-and-services/nccpe-projects/museum-university-partnership-initiative](http://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/nccpe-projects-and-services/nccpe-projects/museum-university-partnership-initiative)

**Vitae Research Development Framework**

Vitae works all over the world in partnership with researchers, higher education institutions, research organisations, research funders and other organisations with a stake in realising the potential of researchers, both championing the needs of researchers and demonstrating their impact on economies and society. It is supported by Research Councils UK (RCUK) and the UK Higher Education funding bodies. The Vitae Researcher Development Framework (RDF) is a professional development resource designed to help researchers identify the skills and experience needed to acquire and chart professional development progress.

[www.vitae.ac.uk/researchers-professional-development/about-the-vitae-researcher-development-framework](http://www.vitae.ac.uk/researchers-professional-development/about-the-vitae-researcher-development-framework)